I think their is nothing wrong with bisexuality. I find women attractive and have no problem with it. I don't consider myself bisexual because I prefer men but I think that because sex can be a natural extention of emotional attachment, love, and attraction it's easy for a person to become bisexual if they are open minded. To quote a friend of mine "What would you do if you fell in love with someone and they happend to be the same sex. Don't through away love just because of the outer shell. And if your attracted to the outer shell... that just makes things even better".

I think their is nothing wrong with bisexuality. I find women attractive and have no problem with it. I don't consider myself bisexual because I prefer men but I think that because sex can be a natural extention of emotional attachment, love, and attraction it's easy for a person to become bisexual if they are open minded. To quote a friend of mine "What would you do if you fell in love with someone and they happend to be the same sex. Don't through away love just because of the outer shell. And if your attracted to the outer shell... that just makes things even better".

AmuseMe, I just finished a 12 hr shift and have to be back in 8 hours so it may be awhile before I can respond more. I just wanted to say no, I don't believe your comments are a personal attack on my beliefs.

AmuseMe, I just finished a 12 hr shift and have to be back in 8 hours so it may be awhile before I can respond more. I just wanted to say no, I don't believe your comments are a personal attack on my beliefs.

Well, I guess we will have to agree to disagree on the subject of Christianity vs. sex.
But I must say, even after an apology you still believe my comments are a personal attack on your religious beliefs?
I think you just don't like my opinion.
And just some FYI of other popular opinion:
Modern religious history revisionists have used the Sodom example to name sexual intercourse involving anal or oral copulation sodomy as a means of identifying the most heinous of crimes against god.
Laurence Gardner (author of The Magdalene Legacy and Genesis of the Grail Kings), has noted that based on writings from the Nag Hammadi Library, codices (copies of much older Greek works) included tracts of various texts (including previously unknown gospels): "The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, for example, are not presented as centres of wickedness and debauchery, but as cities of great wisdom and learning."
What occurred there some 6,000 years ago has been called "the most crucial event in human history." (The Age of God-Kings, Time Life Books) Literally, seemingly out of nowhere, a highly advanced, thriving culture appeared sometime after 4000 B.C.(although some argue the Sumerians may have arrived as early as 8500 B.C. and earlier). What is clear is that the Sumerians developed a highly sophisticated system of irrigation and agriculture, which took full advantage of the waters of the two rivers. They quickly established magnificent cities, advanced governing laws, and a written language so sophisticated that characteristics of Sumerian grammar can be found in at least 6 other relatively modern yet culturally distinct languages, including Indo-European but yet bears no relation to ancient Arabic, Assyrian, Egyptian, or culturally similar dialect.
What happened to Sodom and Gomorrah? Well, since I was asked what I think, I will tell you. I think that a major environmental catastrophe befell the land, be it climate change or a meteor, or even perhaps given the intelligence and technological level of the people, chemical warfare (which is also of some popular opinion). All of these theories are easier to believe than "God raining down brimstone and fire".
Let us not forget that there have been at least five (5) other major cities equally decimated in the region unearthed in excavations and each of these have the telltale signs of ash and sulfur balls present.
BTW, Lots wife was turned into a pillar of salt, right? As I am sure you know, in Hebrew, the word used for "salt" also means "vapor".
Too bad for Lot and his daughters that he was not told that there were other cities, other populations in which to find refuge, else they would not have considered incest and lain with each other in order to procreate! Lots daughters all bore him sons. I suppose the sin of incest was a technical difficulty in his haste to repopulate the Earth (had nothing to do with the fact that his wife had departed and he wanted a hole to hide it in, I am sure), for he was not murdered as the Sodomites were for similar sins.
Go ahead and pray for me, I won't hold it against you. :-P

Well, I guess we will have to agree to disagree on the subject of Christianity vs. sex. But I must say, even after an apology you still believe my comments are a personal attack on your religious beliefs? I think you just don't like my opinion. And just some FYI of other popular opinion: Modern religious history revisionists have used the Sodom example to name sexual intercourse involving anal or oral copulation sodomy as a means of identifying the most heinous of crimes against god. Laurence Gardner (author of The Magdalene Legacy and Genesis of the Grail Kings), has noted that based on writings from the Nag Hammadi Library, codices (copies of much older Greek works) included tracts of various texts (including previously unknown gospels): "The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, for example, are not presented as centres of wickedness and debauchery, but as cities of great wisdom and learning." What occurred there some 6,000 years ago has been called "the most crucial event in human history." (The Age of God-Kings, Time Life Books) Literally, seemingly out of nowhere, a highly advanced, thriving culture appeared sometime after 4000 B.C.(although some argue the Sumerians may have arrived as early as 8500 B.C. and earlier). What is clear is that the Sumerians developed a highly sophisticated system of irrigation and agriculture, which took full advantage of the waters of the two rivers. They quickly established magnificent cities, advanced governing laws, and a written language so sophisticated that characteristics of Sumerian grammar can be found in at least 6 other relatively modern yet culturally distinct languages, including Indo-European but yet bears no relation to ancient Arabic, Assyrian, Egyptian, or culturally similar dialect. What happened to Sodom and Gomorrah? Well, since I was asked what I think, I will tell you. I think that a major environmental catastrophe befell the land, be it climate change or a meteor, or even perhaps given the intelligence and technological level of the people, chemical warfare (which is also of some popular opinion). All of these theories are easier to believe than "God raining down brimstone and fire". Let us not forget that there have been at least five (5) other major cities equally decimated in the region unearthed in excavations and each of these have the telltale signs of ash and sulfur balls present. BTW, Lots wife was turned into a pillar of salt, right? As I am sure you know, in Hebrew, the word used for "salt" also means "vapor". Too bad for Lot and his daughters that he was not told that there were other cities, other populations in which to find refuge, else they would not have considered incest and lain with each other in order to procreate! Lots daughters all bore him sons. I suppose the sin of incest was a technical difficulty in his haste to repopulate the Earth (had nothing to do with the fact that his wife had departed and he wanted a hole to hide it in, I am sure), for he was not murdered as the Sodomites were for similar sins. Go ahead and pray for me, I won't hold it against you. :-P

In your rocking-chair, by your window dreaming, shall you long, alone. In your rocking-chair, by your window, shall you dream such happiness as you may never feel. –Theodore Dreiser

I agree with your statements CoverGirl. Indeed, man and woman do fit together very nice, like pieces of a puzzle that interlock at the right spots.
AmuseMe, if you read the book Song of Songs carefully, you will discover there are 2 lovers in it, a black and beautiful young woman and a radiant and ruddy young man who work as shepherds and sing their undying love for one another in a series of dialogues and monologues. They are in paradise and celebrate each others beauty and physical pleasure but other characters do intrude. The lovers are free of domination,committed, strong and mutual in their relationship. Further down where you point out some verses and it says "my sister", the same Hebrew word can also be translated as "my beloved", which makes more sense to me-"my beloved, my spouse."
If you believe that bisexuality was commonly accepted and a lifestyle for most people at the time this was written, please explain to me what you think happened to the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and why? Also, why do you think anal sex is called Sodomy?
I don't feel that the Bible is filled with hypocrasy. What I did find for myself was that once I really took the time to study what it said, read it, and examine it, the discrepancies I originally thought were there were there no longer.
I accept your apology AmuseMe. I did feel a bit offended by your statements, but that was not my main reason for posting a reply first and then yours seperate. As you can see, it was much longer, so I decided to go ahead and post the short one while I wrote the reply to you.
One thing I have gleaned over the years, is to learn enough about someone else's religious beliefs so that I can be respectful of them even if I don't believe what they believe myself.

I agree with your statements CoverGirl. Indeed, man and woman do fit together very nice, like pieces of a puzzle that interlock at the right spots. AmuseMe, if you read the book Song of Songs carefully, you will discover there are 2 lovers in it, a black and beautiful young woman and a radiant and ruddy young man who work as shepherds and sing their undying love for one another in a series of dialogues and monologues. They are in paradise and celebrate each others beauty and physical pleasure but other characters do intrude. The lovers are free of domination,committed, strong and mutual in their relationship. Further down where you point out some verses and it says "my sister", the same Hebrew word can also be translated as "my beloved", which makes more sense to me-"my beloved, my spouse." If you believe that bisexuality was commonly accepted and a lifestyle for most people at the time this was written, please explain to me what you think happened to the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah and why? Also, why do you think anal sex is called Sodomy? I don't feel that the Bible is filled with hypocrasy. What I did find for myself was that once I really took the time to study what it said, read it, and examine it, the discrepancies I originally thought were there were there no longer. I accept your apology AmuseMe. I did feel a bit offended by your statements, but that was not my main reason for posting a reply first and then yours seperate. As you can see, it was much longer, so I decided to go ahead and post the short one while I wrote the reply to you. One thing I have gleaned over the years, is to learn enough about someone else's religious beliefs so that I can be respectful of them even if I don't believe what they believe myself.

I think that female bisexuality is more readily accepted due to the basic nature of women.
Women are generally seen as more affectionate and nuturing than men. Not only in regard to their children, spouses or family, but also to other women.
We become emotionally intimate with our female friends. We can share a hotel bed on vacation and a hug in the street without wondering what everyone is thinking. This affection between women is accepted. It's "normal". So I think that it isn't as shocking when two women move onto a relationship that is physically intimate as well.

I think that female bisexuality is more readily accepted due to the basic nature of women. Women are generally seen as more affectionate and nuturing than men. Not only in regard to their children, spouses or family, but also to other women. We become emotionally intimate with our female friends. We can share a hotel bed on vacation and a hug in the street without wondering what everyone is thinking. This affection between women is accepted. It's "normal". So I think that it isn't as shocking when two women move onto a relationship that is physically intimate as well.

Hi all-
It's all a matter of opinion & sexual preference though. Noone can truly judge what is right or wrong for other people, only themselves. I used to live & work in San Francisco where as a society, homosexuality, bisexuality, & tri-sexuality is accepted.
As for the female bisexuality being more accepted over the male, that is absolutely true. There should be no discrimination for either. If people don't like it, they shouldn't look.
I agree about the part where males feel threatened when another guy comes into the picture. It's animal/hunter instinct.

Hi all- It's all a matter of opinion & sexual preference though. Noone can truly judge what is right or wrong for other people, only themselves. I used to live & work in San Francisco where as a society, homosexuality, bisexuality, & tri-sexuality is accepted. As for the female bisexuality being more accepted over the male, that is absolutely true. There should be no discrimination for either. If people don't like it, they shouldn't look. I agree about the part where males feel threatened when another guy comes into the picture. It's animal/hunter instinct.

Wanda, I am by no means attacking your religious beliefs. I am happy for those who can still have faith in something. I too believe in a creator, a supreme being much as you described below.
I didn't refer to the fear of homosexuality as anything "new". Rather I was referring to the raw christian age where it was introduced as a "sin", as evil.
Only in the last century has it become a mainstream criticism.
Why do you suppose anal intercourse is considered unnatural be it male or female?
I think it is safe to assume it is viewed as unnatural because it serves no purpose other than pleasure.
Don't get me wrong. I am a christian by principle, I just don't believe in the mainstream practice of the religion. Nor do I have patience for the ancient ideals that christianity was founded on.
I wasn't attacking you, Wanda. I was just giving you something to read. :-)

Wanda, I am by no means attacking your religious beliefs. I am happy for those who can still have faith in something. I too believe in a creator, a supreme being much as you described below. I didn't refer to the fear of homosexuality as anything "new". Rather I was referring to the raw christian age where it was introduced as a "sin", as evil. Only in the last century has it become a mainstream criticism. Why do you suppose anal intercourse is considered unnatural be it male or female? I think it is safe to assume it is viewed as unnatural because it serves no purpose other than pleasure. Don't get me wrong. I am a christian by principle, I just don't believe in the mainstream practice of the religion. Nor do I have patience for the ancient ideals that christianity was founded on. I wasn't attacking you, Wanda. I was just giving you something to read. :-)

In your rocking-chair, by your window dreaming, shall you long, alone. In your rocking-chair, by your window, shall you dream such happiness as you may never feel. –Theodore Dreiser

Let's please try to keep this as a polite discussion and not be attacking anyone's religious beliefs? I started this blog with the intent of having a discussion on why men thought differently than women. It is not my intent to appear to be judging anyone, as I am not, nor am I trying to proselytize to anyone.
Does God allow us to have pleasure? Of course God allows us to have pleasure! Over the years, one of my greatest pleasures has been the giving and receiving of love with my children and watching them grow. I take pleasure in helping people, in seeing the beauty in nature in the awesome world that surrounds us.I have taken great pleasure in seeing, hearing ,tasting,touching and smelling pleasurable things! Most people marry as it is a pleasure to them to be able to spend much of their time with someone they love. God wants us to have pleasure in line with his purpose in our lives and in ways that glorfy him.Most of all, God wants us to take pleasure in him. He wants what is best for us as well as what is acceptable to him, just as you would want your child to have pleasure in ways that you accept. Would you allow your child to sit there and repeatedly slice their arm open because they found pleasure in seeing the blood come out? No, you would tell them ahead of time the purpose of a knife and not to cut themselves with it. God does the same.
Does God allow us to have sexual pleasure? Most higher animals only copulate when the female of the species is susceptible to fertilization and only a very few species of animals ever engage in sexual intercourse at all. We were create with a continued sexual interest and appeal. Proverbs 5:18-19 says "Let your fountain be blessed, And rejoice in the wife of your youth. As a loving hind and a graceful doe, Let her breasts satisfy you at all times; Be exhilarated always with her love." That sounds to me like we were created to glean some pleasure at sometime or another ; )
AmuseMe brought up the question, is homosexuality (male or female) a sin? That's God's call, not mine. I have an easy task; all I really have to do is "love my neighbor as myself." I get to give the rest to God. I have people I love dearly that are very close to me, who choose these lifestyles; what they do is their own business as far as I am concerned.
I will try to elaborate on my understanding of other comments AmuseMe has made.
In Torah (the first five books of the Talmud, the holy Scriptures of Judaism) and in the Old Testament ( part of the holy Scriptures of Christianity,both of which are the same-just called by different names), one will find what is termed the Law of Moses, which contains the command in Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination." Apparently as far back as 1400 plus years before Christ homosexuality was considered forbidden and unclean.Judaism has been around for thousands of years more than Christianity. In the New Testament, used by Christians, it states in Romans 1:26,27 "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly." There are also other references in the New Testament. Homosexuality is not a new sin of Christianity.
In the book of Genesis, chapter 38, Onan spilled his seed onto the ground, and God slew him. There are numerous reasons why God did this. Judah, Onans father had three sons;Onan was the middle son. When his older brother Er died he left behind a widow, Tamar; it was the levirate (brother) law of the time that when a man (Er) died his brother (Onan) was to marry his widow (Tamar) and the firstborn son they had was to carry on Er's name. This enabled the widow to be cared for especially as she aged and the man's name to be carried down. As the firstborn son of Judah, Er was to inherit a double portion of Judahs estate as was customary at the time. Since Er was deceased, Onan now became the firstborn son, UNLESS he fathered a son for his deceased brother; in that case the child then inherited his fathers estate or double portion. In other words, if Onan had a son with Tamar, the child would inherit the double portion estate from Judah that would have been his father Er's had he been alive, and not Onan. Judah instructed his son Onan to marry Tamar and he could have chosen to opt out; there was a provision for that but it would have cost Onan much prestige in the community. He went ahead and married Tamar and instead of conceiving a child with her that may have been a son who would inherit a double portion of Judah's estate, he spilled his seed on the ground so he himself would get the double portion. God slew him for several reasons: because he intentionally disobeyed his father Judah while at the same time pretending to be obeying him, he was being extremely greedy and selfish, he was defrauding his wife Tamar, he was depriving her of having children and he was pretending to be her husband and preventing her from marrying a man who would be a real husband to her. He was being a hypocrite. That's why God slew him; it wasn't just because he spilled his seed, and it wasn't because God considered it an act against him just because he didn't procreate.There was a whole lot more involved there besides seed just being spilled on the ground.
As to the adultery bit, Jesus was talking about men who sent away, kicked out,or put out a wife without giving her a divorce. Men were just sending away their wives without going through legally divorcing them because they had to pay a lump sum to their wife when they did. If she remarried without him divorcing her, the new couple would be committing adultery because she was still lawfully married to the other man. At the time, a man had to be accepting of a divorce, and one of the popular schools of thought was that a man could divorce his wife for any insignificant reason-because she'd gotten old, fat, didn't wash the clothes when he wanted, or cooked something he didn't like and so forth. God planned for marriage to be for a lifetime; Jesus reiterated that and basically stated that unless there is a really good cause for people to divorce, such as adultery, they should not divorce. The Bible also states that it is preferable that if an unmarried woman or widow can't remain celibate to go ahead and marry; that is preferable than her sinning. Once divorced, a woman is no longer married, and would fall into that category.
Well, that's my autodidactic understanding and perspective. One of these days I really do need to learn to type with more than 2 fingers!

Let's please try to keep this as a polite discussion and not be attacking anyone's religious beliefs? I started this blog with the intent of having a discussion on why men thought differently than women. It is not my intent to appear to be judging anyone, as I am not, nor am I trying to proselytize to anyone. Does God allow us to have pleasure? Of course God allows us to have pleasure! Over the years, one of my greatest pleasures has been the giving and receiving of love with my children and watching them grow. I take pleasure in helping people, in seeing the beauty in nature in the awesome world that surrounds us.I have taken great pleasure in seeing, hearing ,tasting,touching and smelling pleasurable things! Most people marry as it is a pleasure to them to be able to spend much of their time with someone they love. God wants us to have pleasure in line with his purpose in our lives and in ways that glorfy him.Most of all, God wants us to take pleasure in him. He wants what is best for us as well as what is acceptable to him, just as you would want your child to have pleasure in ways that you accept. Would you allow your child to sit there and repeatedly slice their arm open because they found pleasure in seeing the blood come out? No, you would tell them ahead of time the purpose of a knife and not to cut themselves with it. God does the same. Does God allow us to have sexual pleasure? Most higher animals only copulate when the female of the species is susceptible to fertilization and only a very few species of animals ever engage in sexual intercourse at all. We were create with a continued sexual interest and appeal. Proverbs 5:18-19 says "Let your fountain be blessed, And rejoice in the wife of your youth. As a loving hind and a graceful doe, Let her breasts satisfy you at all times; Be exhilarated always with her love." That sounds to me like we were created to glean some pleasure at sometime or another ; ) AmuseMe brought up the question, is homosexuality (male or female) a sin? That's God's call, not mine. I have an easy task; all I really have to do is "love my neighbor as myself." I get to give the rest to God. I have people I love dearly that are very close to me, who choose these lifestyles; what they do is their own business as far as I am concerned. I will try to elaborate on my understanding of other comments AmuseMe has made. In Torah (the first five books of the Talmud, the holy Scriptures of Judaism) and in the Old Testament ( part of the holy Scriptures of Christianity,both of which are the same-just called by different names), one will find what is termed the Law of Moses, which contains the command in Leviticus 18:22 "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it [is] abomination." Apparently as far back as 1400 plus years before Christ homosexuality was considered forbidden and unclean.Judaism has been around for thousands of years more than Christianity. In the New Testament, used by Christians, it states in Romans 1:26,27 "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly." There are also other references in the New Testament. Homosexuality is not a new sin of Christianity. In the book of Genesis, chapter 38, Onan spilled his seed onto the ground, and God slew him. There are numerous reasons why God did this. Judah, Onans father had three sons;Onan was the middle son. When his older brother Er died he left behind a widow, Tamar; it was the levirate (brother) law of the time that when a man (Er) died his brother (Onan) was to marry his widow (Tamar) and the firstborn son they had was to carry on Er's name. This enabled the widow to be cared for especially as she aged and the man's name to be carried down. As the firstborn son of Judah, Er was to inherit a double portion of Judahs estate as was customary at the time. Since Er was deceased, Onan now became the firstborn son, UNLESS he fathered a son for his deceased brother; in that case the child then inherited his fathers estate or double portion. In other words, if Onan had a son with Tamar, the child would inherit the double portion estate from Judah that would have been his father Er's had he been alive, and not Onan. Judah instructed his son Onan to marry Tamar and he could have chosen to opt out; there was a provision for that but it would have cost Onan much prestige in the community. He went ahead and married Tamar and instead of conceiving a child with her that may have been a son who would inherit a double portion of Judah's estate, he spilled his seed on the ground so he himself would get the double portion. God slew him for several reasons: because he intentionally disobeyed his father Judah while at the same time pretending to be obeying him, he was being extremely greedy and selfish, he was defrauding his wife Tamar, he was depriving her of having children and he was pretending to be her husband and preventing her from marrying a man who would be a real husband to her. He was being a hypocrite. That's why God slew him; it wasn't just because he spilled his seed, and it wasn't because God considered it an act against him just because he didn't procreate.There was a whole lot more involved there besides seed just being spilled on the ground. As to the adultery bit, Jesus was talking about men who sent away, kicked out,or put out a wife without giving her a divorce. Men were just sending away their wives without going through legally divorcing them because they had to pay a lump sum to their wife when they did. If she remarried without him divorcing her, the new couple would be committing adultery because she was still lawfully married to the other man. At the time, a man had to be accepting of a divorce, and one of the popular schools of thought was that a man could divorce his wife for any insignificant reason-because she'd gotten old, fat, didn't wash the clothes when he wanted, or cooked something he didn't like and so forth. God planned for marriage to be for a lifetime; Jesus reiterated that and basically stated that unless there is a really good cause for people to divorce, such as adultery, they should not divorce. The Bible also states that it is preferable that if an unmarried woman or widow can't remain celibate to go ahead and marry; that is preferable than her sinning. Once divorced, a woman is no longer married, and would fall into that category. Well, that's my autodidactic understanding and perspective. One of these days I really do need to learn to type with more than 2 fingers!

Wanda, you lack of response to me leads me to assume that you have been offended by my statements.. and I apologize if I did offend you or anyone else reading your blog, because that was not my intention.

Wanda, you lack of response to me leads me to assume that you have been offended by my statements.. and I apologize if I did offend you or anyone else reading your blog, because that was not my intention.

In your rocking-chair, by your window dreaming, shall you long, alone. In your rocking-chair, by your window, shall you dream such happiness as you may never feel. –Theodore Dreiser

MrG-I see you have the opinion of many males. My question though is why? Why do you find it repulsive for males but beautiful for females? What's the difference?
Bizzle-you make me laugh...little girls all bouncing around...
Bluegirl-Interesting observations;thanks.
WWGuy-Very interesting documentary you watched. Thanks for sharing it. If I recall correctly in the Tongan Islands in the South Pacific there has also always been a group of homosexual males who are open and accepted by all.

MrG-I see you have the opinion of many males. My question though is why? Why do you find it repulsive for males but beautiful for females? What's the difference? Bizzle-you make me laugh...little girls all bouncing around... Bluegirl-Interesting observations;thanks. WWGuy-Very interesting documentary you watched. Thanks for sharing it. If I recall correctly in the Tongan Islands in the South Pacific there has also always been a group of homosexual males who are open and accepted by all.

... and of course the last of my comment somehow disappeared...
but what I wanted to say was, CoverGirl, the 'holy book' is riddled with hypocrisy after hypocrisy with dos and donts which gives no other alternative than for one to read into its lines what one will, and left to the imagination of MAN, what chaos we live in today is the result of misinterpreted guidelines.
I don't disagree with your point, quite the contrary.
WANDA - Absolutely FANTASTIC topic! As usual. lol

... and of course the last of my comment somehow disappeared... but what I wanted to say was, CoverGirl, the 'holy book' is riddled with hypocrisy after hypocrisy with dos and donts which gives no other alternative than for one to read into its lines what one will, and left to the imagination of MAN, what chaos we live in today is the result of misinterpreted guidelines. I don't disagree with your point, quite the contrary. WANDA - Absolutely FANTASTIC topic! As usual. lol

In your rocking-chair, by your window dreaming, shall you long, alone. In your rocking-chair, by your window, shall you dream such happiness as you may never feel. –Theodore Dreiser

Hey CoverGirl, it's all in the interpretation. The Song of Soloman is hypocrisy at its finest. I wonder if you discovered this section of the old testament yourself like I did and are now expressing your own opinion of the tale or someone Else's? Seems to me that the Song of Soloman, speaking of bisexuality, was written by a bisexual.
Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love is better than wine.
and several verses following:
Thou hast ravished my heart, my sister, my spouse; thou hast ravished my heart with one of thine eyes, with one chain of thy neck.
How fair is thy love, my sister, my spouse! how much better is thy love than wine! and the smell of thine ointments than all spices!
There is little doubt in my mind that at the time this little story was written, bisexuality was commonly accepted and a lifestyle for most people. At least until the male christian movement slapped sin across it and called it evil.

Hey CoverGirl, it's all in the interpretation. The Song of Soloman is hypocrisy at its finest. I wonder if you discovered this section of the old testament yourself like I did and are now expressing your own opinion of the tale or someone Else's? Seems to me that the Song of Soloman, speaking of bisexuality, was written by a bisexual. Let him kiss me with the kisses of his mouth: for thy love is better than wine. and several verses following: Thou hast ravished my heart, my sister, my spouse; thou hast ravished my heart with one of thine eyes, with one chain of thy neck. How fair is thy love, my sister, my spouse! how much better is thy love than wine! and the smell of thine ointments than all spices! There is little doubt in my mind that at the time this little story was written, bisexuality was commonly accepted and a lifestyle for most people. At least until the male christian movement slapped sin across it and called it evil.

In your rocking-chair, by your window dreaming, shall you long, alone. In your rocking-chair, by your window, shall you dream such happiness as you may never feel. –Theodore Dreiser

WOW WWguy! Great comment!
By the way - my ex brother-in-law talked his wife of four years (and mother of his children) into partying with two other girls (took him two years to accomplish this, btw lol). She consented; she had her own girl, he had his own girl ... long - but funny I assure you - story short, she left him for the chick.
Funniest sh*t ever!

WOW WWguy! Great comment! By the way - my ex brother-in-law talked his wife of four years (and mother of his children) into partying with two other girls (took him two years to accomplish this, btw lol). She consented; she had her own girl, he had his own girl ... long - but funny I assure you - story short, she left him for the chick. Funniest sh*t ever!

In your rocking-chair, by your window dreaming, shall you long, alone. In your rocking-chair, by your window, shall you dream such happiness as you may never feel. –Theodore Dreiser

Male bisexuality was made a deplorable, sinful act by christendom ? pretty much on the whole - spilling the seed without procreation in mind is viewed as an act against god.
"[...] an ancient prejudice, prooftexting from a few verses in the Bible to show that [homosexuality] is evil and that if we bless this evil, God will take his hand off this nation and it will spiral into oblivion." - Mel White
Sometime over the last century the "uncontrollably oversexed" female has been replaced as the "christian public enemy no. 1" by the homosexual male. Sex is viewed as a selfless act, an act of procreation only - even to this day by many so called christian figureheads/leaders. So naturally, dating back from the king James translated version of the bible, homosexual liberty was viewed as a sin only because it was a waste of "seed". Of course, satirically speaking, any act of taking ones pleasure where they found it was considered a sin against a god that allowed no self indulgence and accepted no excuse for mankind to glean pleasure from our meager human existence.
I think that because we as a people have been raised with the notion that same sex relationships - especially "male" driven into our very young and sponge-like minds by our fathers who sneered at any "queer" reference while simultaneously drooling over two females lip-locked - has been the fuel that has fed the fire as with any act of prejudice.
Let me steal another, more profound statement:
Verses 11-12: "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and maries another, she commits adultery."
"This seems pretty clear teaching from the mouth of "Jesus" himself. Yet most Christian churches permit remarriage after divorce. And Paul, who I am gathering must have been familiar with Jesus' teaching in this regard, felt free to modify it to allow for divorce when it facilitated church membership. This raises a couple of questions: Is Jesus just expressing an ideal here, or is he laying down law? Why did Paul feel he had the right to take what, I think, has to be construed as a softer stance on the issue than Jesus did? Why do people who insist that same-sex intimacy is incompatible with Scripture not think that divorce is incompatible with Scripture? Some of the loudest voices raised against gays and lesbians in our church are by male leaders in second marriages." - Jim Naughton
Amen, brother - or is it sister?
On the other hand:
Men love the idea of woman on woman action. This fantasy has not changed since time began, church or no church. How else were we made as public enemy no. 1 if not for the fact that we are only sexual beings put on this earth to bring a man to pleasure ... by any means necessary. It is the man's responsibility to control our sexual devices, to put us in check, because god's intent for Adams' Eve was to embody sexuality in order to bear his children.
So this is my opinion, an hypothesis if you will ... and this standard of hypocrisy is why, since aquiring a modicum amount of common sense as an adult, I am not a member of any church organization.

Male bisexuality was made a deplorable, sinful act by christendom ? pretty much on the whole - spilling the seed without procreation in mind is viewed as an act against god. "[...] an ancient prejudice, prooftexting from a few verses in the Bible to show that [homosexuality] is evil and that if we bless this evil, God will take his hand off this nation and it will spiral into oblivion." - Mel White Sometime over the last century the "uncontrollably oversexed" female has been replaced as the "christian public enemy no. 1" by the homosexual male. Sex is viewed as a selfless act, an act of procreation only - even to this day by many so called christian figureheads/leaders. So naturally, dating back from the king James translated version of the bible, homosexual liberty was viewed as a sin only because it was a waste of "seed". Of course, satirically speaking, any act of taking ones pleasure where they found it was considered a sin against a god that allowed no self indulgence and accepted no excuse for mankind to glean pleasure from our meager human existence. I think that because we as a people have been raised with the notion that same sex relationships - especially "male" driven into our very young and sponge-like minds by our fathers who sneered at any "queer" reference while simultaneously drooling over two females lip-locked - has been the fuel that has fed the fire as with any act of prejudice. Let me steal another, more profound statement: Verses 11-12: "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and maries another, she commits adultery." "This seems pretty clear teaching from the mouth of "Jesus" himself. Yet most Christian churches permit remarriage after divorce. And Paul, who I am gathering must have been familiar with Jesus' teaching in this regard, felt free to modify it to allow for divorce when it facilitated church membership. This raises a couple of questions: Is Jesus just expressing an ideal here, or is he laying down law? Why did Paul feel he had the right to take what, I think, has to be construed as a softer stance on the issue than Jesus did? Why do people who insist that same-sex intimacy is incompatible with Scripture not think that divorce is incompatible with Scripture? Some of the loudest voices raised against gays and lesbians in our church are by male leaders in second marriages." - Jim Naughton Amen, brother - or is it sister? On the other hand: Men love the idea of woman on woman action. This fantasy has not changed since time began, church or no church. How else were we made as public enemy no. 1 if not for the fact that we are only sexual beings put on this earth to bring a man to pleasure ... by any means necessary. It is the man's responsibility to control our sexual devices, to put us in check, because god's intent for Adams' Eve was to embody sexuality in order to bear his children. So this is my opinion, an hypothesis if you will ... and this standard of hypocrisy is why, since aquiring a modicum amount of common sense as an adult, I am not a member of any church organization.

In your rocking-chair, by your window dreaming, shall you long, alone. In your rocking-chair, by your window, shall you dream such happiness as you may never feel. –Theodore Dreiser

well I guess that we all think of male bisexuality or homosexuality as basically going in the out door and little else whilst a bunch of giddy girls/women bouncing around etc. doesn't seem so seedy...that's my inital thought on the matter..more may follow, maybe not LOL

well I guess that we all think of male bisexuality or homosexuality as basically going in the out door and little else whilst a bunch of giddy girls/women bouncing around etc. doesn't seem so seedy...that's my inital thought on the matter..more may follow, maybe not LOL